Thoughts on weak notrumps

[S2000magic]

I've been a fan of the weak (12-14 HCP) notrump ever since I read How to Play Winning Bridge: the Kaplan-Sheinwold System about a bazillion years ago. I'd be interested in the thoughts of the folks here.

 

Here's an interesting anecdote, that highlights why I like the bid:

 

Years ago my boss and I used to play bridge at lunch against a fairly strong partnership. Over a 1NT opener they played Pinpoint Astro: two-suited overcalls centered around hearts. When we used a strong 1NT, their "two-suiters" were at least 5-5. When we started playing a weak 1NT, their "two-suiters" started to morph, from 5-5 to 5-4 to . . . eventually . . . 4-4. That's right: a 4-4-3-2 "two-suiter". I guess they felt we were stealing from them.

[Cyberyeti]

This topic has been covered many times.

 

To understand the benefits and weaknesses of weak and strong no trump, you need to look at how the choice of no trump range affects the rest of your system.

 

Do you want to play 4 or 5 card majors ? (or 5 card spade, 4 card heart as some weak no trumpers do)

 

Are you interested in the best system in unopposed or contested auctions ?

 

The sort of example is that if you play a weak no trump and 4 card majors and open 1N with 5M332:

 

If partner opens 1♠, you know he has 5 spades in an unbalanced hand or is 15+.

 

If you play as many do these days that 2/1 is 10+, the 2N rebid can be GF and unlimited, no worries about what to do with the weak no trump hands as you have when playing strong no trump and non GF 2/1.

 

The major disadvantage is that you can have a 4-4 major suit fit and play in 1N when you should be in 2M, but on some of those hands you've kept opps out of the 2oM/3m that they can make by the preemptive value of the weak no trump.

[whereagles]

12-14 is not radical enough.

 

9-11 is more like it. Sometimes 8 with a 5 card suit :)

[Cyberyeti]

12-14 is not radical enough.

 

9-11 is more like it. Sometimes 8 with a 5 card suit :)

Yeah, but that doesn't really bolt on to a standard-ish system very well unless you're playing a strong club, you have to build a system around it.

[helene_t]

I don't like weak notrump in 4th seat, nor in 3rd seat when vulnerable. Opening 1NT with 12 or 13 when partner can have no more than 11 serves no constructive purpose. I appreciate that there are other aims of bidding than constructive ones, but I think that in those two situations the constructive aims are so important that we cannot afford not to allocate the 1NT bid to something constructive. And even when playing weak notrump I often find an excuse for not using it under those circumstances.

 

Also I think that weak notrump with wide-ranging 4-card majors in a natural system like Acol is almost unplayable. When it goes

1M-1NT

?

I want to pass with a weak balanced hand, or bid 2NT with 18-19 balanced. With a balanced hand with a 5-card major I can rebid 2m on a 3-card suit. But with 15-17 balanced with only four cards in my opening suit I am stuck. I know what I am supposed to do: pass with 16 and bid 2NT with 17. But both suck.

 

Playing 5-card majors with variable notrump and some artificial methods over 1♦ to solve the issues with 4441 would be something I would be open to. Because in 1st/2nd seat I like the weak notrump. It raises the safety level that partner knows that I have either a balanced hand or 15+. So both contested and uncontested auctions become potentially easier. I say "potentially", because it takes a lot of thoughts, reading and discussions to work it out. For someone used to playing strong NT, weak notrump it quite difficult at first glance. And I also think that objectively it is more difficult to learn.

[whereagles]

[9-11] Yeah, but that doesn't really bolt on to a standard-ish system very well (...)

 

On the contrary, there's a very simple way to include a mini-NT into your base system:

 

1NT = 9-11

1C-1x-1NT = 12-14

1D-1x-1NT = 15-17

 

Dead easy and very mnemonic.

[glen]

1NT = 9-11

1C-1x-1NT = 12-14

1D-1x-1NT = 15-17

We found it is better to flip:

1C-1x-1NT = 15-17

1D-1x-1NT = 12-14

[S2000magic]

For someone used to playing strong NT, weak notrump it quite difficult at first glance. And I also think that objectively it is more difficult to learn.

This is the direction I was hoping to see in this thread. Thanks.

 

I'm not sure I agree with your conclusions, but they're interesting.

[Free]

I've played both (and different ranges as well), and in my experience a 1NT opening performs better when it's weak, but the rest of your system performs better with a strong NT. That is, in a natural system. Some systems even need a weak NT (like MOSCITO).

 

So when playing weak NT, you'll definitely get the impression that it's a winner because you see the immediate results of your 1NT opening. However, you won't notice it that much when you don't open 1NT and you get into trouble.

[Vampyr]

 

Also I think that weak notrump with wide-ranging 4-card majors in a natural system like Acol is almost unplayable.

 

I agree. I prefer to play 5-card majors and weak notrump; they go well together, as do 4-card majors and strong NT.

 

Playing 5-card majors with variable notrump and some artificial methods over 1♦ to solve the issues with 4441 would be something I would be open to.

 

My regular partner and I open 1♥ on 4=4=4=1 hands in our NT range. Then over 2♠ forcing raise we bid 3NT to show this hand. This is the simplest solution, I think. I don't know how 5-card major players manage this hand in casual/infrequent partnerships.

 

For someone used to playing strong NT, weak notrump it quite difficult at first glance. And I also think that objectively it is more difficult to learn.

 

Why is this? You can learn that a 1NT opening range is 15-17, or that a 1NT opening range is 12-14. I don't see a difference in difficulty.

 

Anyway, I think that strong NT is better theoretically, since it splits the ranges of balanced hands (1suit openings are no longer 15-19). But I like to open 1NT early and often, and I think that in practice it is more effective. We have really good methods over our opening NTs, and the preemptive effect is a big advantage -- even if it means, at MP, just occupying the 1NT spot before the opponents.

[kenrexford]

On the contrary, there's a very simple way to include a mini-NT into your base system:

 

1NT = 9-11

1C-1x-1NT = 12-14

1D-1x-1NT = 15-17

 

Dead easy and very mnemonic.

 

I used a different approach years ago, and it was hysterical at times:

 

1NT = 15-17 (I know, boring. But...)

1♣...1NT = 11-14 (Again, boring. But...)

1♦...PASS or 1NT = 8-10 balanced with 3+ diamonds

 

That made for some fun auctions. Like:

 

1♦ (8-10 or 18-19 if balanced, 11+ if unbalanced)

P

1♥ (4+ hearts, non-forcing max of about 15)

P

P!

[Cyberyeti]

On the contrary, there's a very simple way to include a mini-NT into your base system:

 

1NT = 9-11

1C-1x-1NT = 12-14

1D-1x-1NT = 15-17

 

Dead easy and very mnemonic.

If you want to have 2 card club and diamond with all the distortions that creates for your minor suit auctions. I consider that a major issue.

[Cyberyeti]

I don't like weak notrump in 4th seat, nor in 3rd seat when vulnerable. Opening 1NT with 12 or 13 when partner can have no more than 11 serves no constructive purpose. I appreciate that there are other aims of bidding than constructive ones, but I think that in those two situations the constructive aims are so important that we cannot afford not to allocate the 1NT bid to something constructive. And even when playing weak notrump I often find an excuse for not using it under those circumstances.

 

Also I think that weak notrump with wide-ranging 4-card majors in a natural system like Acol is almost unplayable. When it goes

1M-1NT

?

I want to pass with a weak balanced hand, or bid 2NT with 18-19 balanced. With a balanced hand with a 5-card major I can rebid 2m on a 3-card suit. But with 15-17 balanced with only four cards in my opening suit I am stuck. I know what I am supposed to do: pass with 16 and bid 2NT with 17. But both suck.

 

Playing 5-card majors with variable notrump and some artificial methods over 1♦ to solve the issues with 4441 would be something I would be open to. Because in 1st/2nd seat I like the weak notrump. It raises the safety level that partner know what I have either a balanced hand or 15+. So both contested and uncontested auctions become potentially easier. I say "potentially", because it takes a lot of thoughts, reading and discussions to work it out. For someone used to playing strong NT, weak notrump it quite difficult at first glance. And I also think that objectively it is more difficult to learn.

You have the bad decision over 1M-1N a lot less if you open the minor on 4M4m hands.

[helene_t]

Why is this? You can learn that a 1NT opening range is 15-17, or that a 1NT opening range is 12-14. I don't see a difference in difficulty.

The 12-14 hands are not difficult to deal with if you don't open 1NT. You can pass in all nonforcing situations, or make a simple raise.

 

The 15-17 hands are more difficult if you don't open 1NT. OK, you can rebid notrumps in uncontested auctions. But there are many contested auctions where you are too strong to pass comfortably but also don't have a good bid. Beginners are told to double whenever opps interfere at the 2-level over partner's 1-level response. But those doubles are quite difficult for partner to handle, especially if you also double on hands with more classic t/o shape.

 

I see many club players open in a suit and then jump raise partner on sterile 15 counts. OK, they are bean counters, and some will tell them that an advantage of the weak notrump is that a single raise shows either extra values or shape. So they don't have to feel like underbidding when they raise with good unbalanced 13-counts and 4-card support. I suppose this is good advice but next time they make a single raise with 11 points and 3-card support .....

 

And how many club players know that

1♥-(2♣)-2♠-(pass)

2NT*

does not show extras (playing forcing freebids)?

 

Then there is the issue with the notrump rebid. Most Acol players define the 1NT rebid as exactly 15-16 balanced. It is an incredible waste to use the cheapest rebid (which should contain the widest range of hands) to something that narrow. Traditionally, all kind of other things have been put into the 1NT rebid as well, but for some reason this has gone out of fashion. As it is, people open and repeat suits like Jxxxx because they don't have an off-shape notrump rebid available for awkward minimums.

 

Finally, a sensible weak-notrump system is a variable-notrump system. So you will be playing very different systems after a 4th seat opening than after a 1st seat opening.

 

So while the system as such may not require more memorizing than a strong nt system, I think it requires more judgment, and if you at some point decide to make modifications to the system to reduce the amount of guesswork then the system will become different and more complicated.

[wank]

You have the bad decision over 1M-1N a lot less if you open the minor on 4M4m hands.

why would i play 4cM if i wasn't going to open them when i have them?

[EricK]

Also I think that weak notrump with wide-ranging 4-card majors in a natural system like Acol is almost unplayable. When it goes

1M-1NT

?

I want to pass with a weak balanced hand, or bid 2NT with 18-19 balanced. With a balanced hand with a 5-card major I can rebid 2m on a 3-card suit. But with 15-17 balanced with only four cards in my opening suit I am stuck. I know what I am supposed to do: pass with 16 and bid 2NT with 17. But both suck.

Which, I guess, is why in original Acol a 2/1 could be made on quite a weak hand - so no need for opener to stretch on 15/16 in an auction which starts 1M 1NT.

 

Of course, this approach is not without problems of its own! But then Acol seems to have been designed to give the opponents major problems in competitive auctions (light openings, often starting with 1M or 1NT) at the expense of a few problems in purely constructive auctions

[Flem72]

I've been a fan of the weak (12-14 HCP) notrump ever since I read How to Play Winning Bridge: the Kaplan-Sheinwold System about a bazillion years ago.

 

Me too -- how I learned to play bridge. Though this debate -- especially re: the virtues of the "SNT double" in comp -- will never be resolved, since it is dependent on specific deals, I can't tell you how it HURTS me when, playing SNT, I have to open 1m in 3rd or 4th. Blech.

 

Regards and Happy Trails,

 

Scott Needham

Boulder, Colorado, USA

[akwoo]

And how many club players know that

1♥-(2♣)-2♠-(pass)

2NT*

does not show extras (playing forcing freebids)?

 

The weak NT changes everything, and one of the things it changes is that the arguments for non-forcing freebids become a lot stronger.

[Cyberyeti]

why would i play 4cM if i wasn't going to open them when i have them?

So you don't have to open short suits ever and can actually sensibly bid minor suit hands. It always amuses me when 10 or 11 card club fits are missed in competition because the guy with 6 or 7 of them only showed 2 and his partner didn't want to raise with 4.

[whereagles]

If you want to have 2 card club and diamond with all the distortions that creates for your minor suit auctions. I consider that a major issue.

 

It's actually a non-issue, but ok I'm not going to try and convince you just for the sake of it :P

[Cyberyeti]

It's actually a non-issue, but ok I'm not going to try and convince you just for the sake of it :P

It's a non issue in uncontested auctions, but you're guessing completely an awful lot of the time as soon as the next hand WJOs aggressively (we do this systemically on 4 card suits), and have plenty of occasions where cold games are passed out and collecting 50s because neither hand can double as they hold 4 trumps, and nobody knows what the real shapes are. Also I have a large collection of hands where big minor suit fits never get found in similar circumstances after partner raises the WJO.

[whereagles]

So, you're saying 4-card WJO are the doomsday of preparatory 1m bids?

 

Oh well...

[Cyberyeti]

So, you're saying 4-card WJO are the doomsday of preparatory 1m bids?

 

Oh well...

No, I'm just saying that in my experience, hyper aggressive overcalling over 2 card minors has caused enough stupid (in a good way) results that I think that while the benefit/disadvantage equation of playing 2455 is pretty even, playing 2255 is well below par.

[whereagles]

Well, I fail to see how the alternative, a 3+card minor 1m opening, would fare galactically better. But maybe that's just me.

[Cyberyeti]

Well, I fail to see how the alternative, a 3+card minor 1m opening, would fare galactically better. But maybe that's just me.

Maybe, but as somebody who plays a weak no trump with 4+ card minors, we at least have a chance to bid these.